Sage Advice 3/21/16 Exploding druids and antimagic field vs zombies and cure wounds

The answer to the druid and metal armor is excellent. Not so much the ruling itself, but the clear way it explains that classes have both story and game elements, and some classes have more story elements than others.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

There is a new Sage Advice column by WotC's Jeremy Crawford up at WotC's website. It takes a look at druids wearing metal armor, casting a bonus action spell, using dispel magic to dispel a magical effect like a vampire’s Charm ability or the creations of a spell like animate dead, readying dispel magic to stop another spell from taking effect, and using a shield with mage armor.

 

[Al2O3]

I like the comparison of druids wearing metal armor to vegetarians eating meat. Makes it easy to understand and easy to when considering if one wants to change (either as player or as DM not caring about that part of world-building).

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I like the comparison of druids wearing metal armor to vegetarians eating meat. Makes it easy to understand and easy to when considering if one wants to change (either as player or as DM not caring about that part of world-building).

The comparison is decent, but not strong enough for me. A druid's feelings toward metal armor and shields is more like the Jewish or Muslim aversion for unclean meat and pork. Much more serious consequences there than just a vegetarian eating meat.

 

[GrumpyGamer]

I prefer the simple explanation of them exploding. It opens up a campaign arc of an evil gnome who is using illusions to trick Druids into putting on metal armor only to explode. The party has to track down the gnome before all of the Druids are gone.

 

[Ath-kethin]

The comparison is decent, but not strong enough for me. A druid's feelings toward metal armor and shields is more like the Jewish or Muslim aversion for unclean meat and pork. Much more serious consequences there than just a vegetarian eating meat.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a) not a vegetarian and b) don't know any vegetarians.

 

[TwoSix]

The comparison is decent, but not strong enough for me. A druid's feelings toward metal armor and shields is more like the Jewish or Muslim aversion for unclean meat and pork. Much more serious consequences there than just a vegetarian eating meat.

If a vegetarian hasn't eaten meat for a long time, having meat in their digestive tract is quite likely to cause an exploding vegetarian, IYKWIM.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you are a) not a vegetarian and b) don't know any vegetarians.

And you may be getting too generic, as there is a big difference between an average vegetarian and a vegan. I know vegetarians and if they accidentally eat some meat, they get on with their lives like it never happened. A vegan is who you sound like you are referring to, as accidentally eating meat would probably freak them out almost to the degree that pork would to a Jew or Muslim. Vegan is much more extreme and I should have included them in my comparison as well.

 

[Byakugan]

If a vegetarian hasn't eaten meat for a long time, having meat in their digestive tract is quite likely to cause an exploding vegetarian, IYKWIM.

Thats the problem. So many vegetarians are closet meat eaters.

 

[feartheminotaur]

I'm gonna guess that, while that is a pretty good analogy, that a multinational corporation is going to avoid anything to do with a loaded subject like religion so as to not raise the ire of paying customers that adheres to either of those faiths or competing ones as well as those that reject faith outright. Religion and Politics. In professional (technical, marketing, development) writing you are trained to avoid both.

Vegetarians? Pffft. They don't count - and they tend to have a decent sense of humor.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Thats the problem. So many vegetarians are closet meat eaters.

No, the problem of which you speak is not that many vegetarians are closet meat eaters - it's that a number of meat eaters lie and say they are vegetarians. The distinction is very important.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Wtf is "closet meat"?

 

[cheezitmojo]

Thats the problem. So many vegetarians are closet meat eaters.

Now I'm imaging a druid, behind closed doors and away from prying eyes, equipping a metal shield and giggling about it.

 

[TwoSix]

Wtf is "closet meat"?

Forum rules prevent me from giving you the answer to that.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I find the bit about "story" vs "game" elements in the Druid and Paladin class interesting.

Highlights for me that that is a very bad way to balance classes. If you want a restriction on kinds of armour for druids, spell it out rules wise! Don't rely on nebulous "story" aspects when balancing.

Part of the paladin OPness problem is that their code is "story", not "game" rules. Making for a very poor balance mechanism that is easily ignored.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Highlights for me that that is a very bad way to balance classes. If you want a restriction on kinds of armour for druids, spell it out rules wise! Don't rely on nebulous "story" aspects when balancing.

It is a rule, though. It's a rule which exists for story (world-building) reasons, rather than balance reasons, but it's still a rule.

"Druids don't wear metal armor" is exactly as much of a rule as "Strength 17 gives a +3 bonus to hit with a longsword"; feel free to ignore either, at your discretion.


Edit Update: I'm bad at math on Mondays.

 

[TwoSix]

It is a rule, though. It's a rule which exists for story (world-building) reasons, rather than balance reasons, but it's still a rule.

"Druids don't wear metal armor" is exactly as much of a rule as "Strength 17 gives a +4 bonus to hit with a longsword"; feel free to ignore either, at your discretion.

Strength 17 gives a+4 to hit with a longsword isn't actually a rule at all.

 

[devincutler]

I like the comparison of druids wearing metal armor to vegetarians eating meat. Makes it easy to understand and easy to when considering if one wants to change (either as player or as DM not caring about that part of world-building).

I agree. Clearly, if a vegan east meat he loses his Vegan powers. So a druid should lose his druid abilities.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I find the bit about "story" vs "game" elements in the Druid and Paladin class interesting.

Highlights for me that that is a very bad way to balance classes. If you want a restriction on kinds of armour for druids, spell it out rules wise! Don't rely on nebulous "story" aspects when balancing.

Part of the paladin OPness problem is that their code is "story", not "game" rules. Making for a very poor balance mechanism that is easily ignored.

One of the takeaways I got was that the story elements aren't used as balancing elements:

As long as you abide by your character’s proficiencies, you’re not going to break anything in the game system, but you might undermine the story and the world being created in your campaign.

A druid wearing scale mail is still "balanced," it's just not as flavorful as a druid NOT wearing scale mail. It's a story concern, NOT a balance concern.

 

[Psikerlord#]

One of the takeaways I got was that the story elements aren't used as balancing elements:



A druid wearing scale mail is still "balanced," it's just not as flavorful as a druid NOT wearing scale mail. It's a story concern, NOT a balance concern.

Crawford is wrong on that point. If the paladin code is not meant to be a genuine limiting of choices, ie a balancing factor, then there is no reason to play a fighter, which breaks the system in my view. Druids wearing armour yeah not so much.

edit: even the metal armour druid is still a balance concern, just not enough of a concern to break the system.